All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: fix potential null dereference bugs
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:18:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1465823880.10050.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160613130507.GA11074@localhost> (sfid-20160613_150522_731750_3B82E728)

On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 09:05 -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> 
> So I did just go and check the generated code for each of these cases
> and gcc didn't elide the subsequent if-test, at least on x86-64 and
> my compiler / build config.  Given http://lwn.net/Articles/342330, it
> seems possible, though.

It's not clear that's the same situation, since tun->sk is very likely
to have been an actual pointer, not an embedded thing like drv_priv.

However, with all this, I think I'd simply not take any chances - the
patch isn't exactly invasive and in some cases (for example the first
hunk of the patch) will even improve the code to the point where the
compiler could warn about uninitialized usage of the pointer when the
code gets modified to use it in case of !txq->sta.

I'd take it, but I guess it's Kalle's decision :)

johannes

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>
Cc: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: fix potential null dereference bugs
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:18:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1465823880.10050.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160613130507.GA11074@localhost> (sfid-20160613_150522_731750_3B82E728)

On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 09:05 -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> 
> So I did just go and check the generated code for each of these cases
> and gcc didn't elide the subsequent if-test, at least on x86-64 and
> my compiler / build config.  Given http://lwn.net/Articles/342330, it
> seems possible, though.

It's not clear that's the same situation, since tun->sk is very likely
to have been an actual pointer, not an embedded thing like drv_priv.

However, with all this, I think I'd simply not take any chances - the
patch isn't exactly invasive and in some cases (for example the first
hunk of the patch) will even improve the code to the point where the
compiler could warn about uninitialized usage of the pointer when the
code gets modified to use it in case of !txq->sta.

I'd take it, but I guess it's Kalle's decision :)

johannes

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-13 13:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-10 12:52 [PATCH] ath10k: fix potential null dereference bugs Bob Copeland
2016-06-10 12:52 ` Bob Copeland
2016-06-13  5:39 ` Michal Kazior
2016-06-13  5:39   ` Michal Kazior
2016-06-13  9:08   ` Johannes Berg
2016-06-13  9:08     ` Johannes Berg
2016-06-13 13:05     ` Bob Copeland
2016-06-13 13:05       ` Bob Copeland
2016-06-13 13:18       ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2016-06-13 13:18         ` Johannes Berg
2016-06-14 13:51         ` Valo, Kalle
2016-06-14 13:51           ` Valo, Kalle
2016-06-14 14:16           ` Bob Copeland
2016-06-14 14:16             ` Bob Copeland
2016-06-14 14:39             ` Valo, Kalle
2016-06-14 14:39               ` Valo, Kalle
2016-06-14 13:53 ` Valo, Kalle
2016-06-14 13:53   ` Valo, Kalle
2016-06-30 10:54 ` Kalle Valo
2016-06-30 10:54   ` Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1465823880.10050.3.camel@sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=me@bobcopeland.com \
    --cc=michal.kazior@tieto.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.